HARI OM TRADERS Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by order dated 15.06.2010 whereby, the agreement executed with the respondentJharkhand Education Project Council on 19.02.2009 was terminated, the present writ petition has been filed. During the pendency of the writ petition vide order dated 20.06.2011, the respondentauthority invoked the Bank Guarantee for Rs.13,23,000/ furnished by the petitioner as security deposit. The order dated 20.06.2011 was challenged by the petitioner by filing I.A. No.3069 of 2011, which has been allowed vide order dated 21.01.2015 and thus, order invoking Bank Guarantee is also under challenge.

(2.) The petitioner pursuant to advertisement published in the newspaper submitted its bid and it was awarded work for construction of Jharkhand Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalaya, Chaibasa, Sadar Block and Agreement No.19F2/200809 was executed on 19.02.2009. The scheduled completion period was 15 months however, the respondentauthority did not provide the site for construction of Girl's High School and subsequently, the site for construction of the School was changed. Layout plan for construction of the School at alternative site was given on 27.01.2010 whereas, the period for agreement was to expire in June, 2010 itself. The petitioner submitted representations for providing free and clear land for construction of the School however, the local villagers objected to construction of the School, which is evidenced in the meeting held between the various authorities including, the Circle Officer and the villagers however, the issue could not be resolved. Though the petitioner due to reasons beyond its control could not complete the work, the agreement was terminated vide order dated 15.06.2010 and subsequently, the Bank Guarantee has been invoked on 20.06.2011.

(3.) Mr. Manoj Tandon, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner refers to various documents annexed with the writ petition and submits that the respondentauthority did not provide land/site for construction of the Girl's High School however, they have terminated the agreement and illegally invoked the Bank Guarantee more than one year after termination of the agreement. Alleging arbitrariness on the part of the respondentauthority, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in contractual matters also, the respondent which is "State" is bound to observe the mandate of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.